Latest news with #HigherEducationCommissionofIndia
The Hindu
a day ago
- Business
- The Hindu
NEP 2020 turns five: Charting India's educational reforms and future pathways
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, India's first comprehensive education policy of the 21st century, is a blueprint for the transformation of the nation into a knowledge society and a global knowledge superpower. Over the past five years, progress has been made by all the stakeholders to implement it, in letter and spirit. This article reviews the achievements, so far, vis-à-vis the major objectives of the policy, challenges faced, and provides suggestions for the future road map. About NEP 2020 Grounded in the foundational five pillars of access, equity, quality, affordability, and accountability, NEP 2020 aims to cultivate an education system that is holistic, flexible, multidisciplinary, and responsive to the demands of the 21st century. It seeks to integrate India's ancient traditional values into the educational fabric, to ensure the holistic development of students to be not only competent professionals but also good human beings. The policy outlines a comprehensive set of core objectives for the higher education sector, designed to bring about a systemic transformation, with milestones up to 2035. Objectives of NEP 2020 The primary objective of the policy is the enhancement of the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) in higher education, from 26.3% (in 2018) to 50% by 2035. This quantitative expansion is coupled with a strong emphasis on the quality of education to improve academic standards concurrently. The policy champions holistic and multidisciplinary education, moving away from the traditional disciplinary silos. A key structural reform is the introduction of a flexible curricular structure and a credit system. To invigorate the research and innovation ecosystem, the policy proposes the establishment of a National Research Foundation (NRF) to fund and promote research across all disciplines. Internationalisation is another significant objective, to promote India as a global study destination by offering quality education at affordable costs. In terms of regulatory and governance reforms, the policy proposed the establishment of a single overarching regulator for higher education, the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), which would replace the existing multiple regulatory bodies. Finally, the NEP 2020 places considerable emphasis on the capacity building of teachers, which includes a focus on comprehensive training and development programs for teachers. Gross enrolments moved up by 20% Due to various initiatives, gross enrollments were estimated to have grown by about 20% in the last five years from 4.14 crores in 2020-21 to 4.95 crores in 2024-25. Post COVID-19, online education has emerged as an enabler in India's higher education landscape, particularly accelerated by the push from NEP 2020 and the digital transformation. The number of HEIs offering online programs has more than doubled, from 42 in 2020-21 to 109 in 2024-25, whereas the number of students enrolled in online undergraduate and postgraduate programs has grown about four times, from 25,905 in 2020-21 to over a lakh in 2024-25, including foreign students. Furthermore, over 90% of the HEIs reported engaging with government e-learning platforms such as SWAYAM and SWAYAM Prabha, indicative of widespread digital readiness and integration. Curricular and pedagogical reforms Progress has been made in restructuring the academic framework to foster greater flexibility and multidisciplinary learning. The Four-Year Undergraduate Program (FYUP), with multiple entry and multiple exit options, has been adopted by over 105 universities, including 19 central institutions. The Academic Bank of Credits (ABC) has been operationalised as a digital platform for storing earned academic credits. By July 2025, over 32 crore ABC IDs have been issued, with credits applicable from the academic year 2021 onwards. Research and innovation ecosystem Efforts have been made to strengthen India's research and innovation landscape. The Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) has been constituted as the new apex body for funding scientific research, with an ambitious target to receive ₹50,000 crore during 2023-28, which includes a budgetary provision of ₹14,000 crore from the Central Government and the balance funds to be sourced through donations from public and private agencies. The initiative of Multidisciplinary Education and Research Universities (MERUs), envisioned development of public universities on par with premier institutions like IITs and IIMs, is progressing. A grant of ₹100 crore, under the Pradhan Mantri Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (PM-USHA) scheme, is earmarked per State Public University (SPU), for their transition to MERUs and 440 units in various states are, so far, approved to boost India's R&D output and global research standing. Internationalisation of higher education Under the UGC 2023 regulations, top 500 ranked global universities are permitted to establish campuses in India. The University of Southampton, U.K. is the first overseas university to open its campus in Gurugram in August 2025. Furthermore, five other globally renowned universities, Illinois Institute of Technology (US..), University of Liverpool (U.K), Victoria University (Australia), Western Sydney University (Australia), and Istituto Europeo di Design (Italy), are set to establish their Indian campuses by 2026-2027. The presence of international universities is expected to foster a more globally connected education ecosystem in India, facilitating interdisciplinary research and innovation. However, the premium cost of the foreign campuses might limit access for many Indian students, potentially creating a two-tiered system that requires careful monitoring to ensure equitable access. Integration of skills and vocational education The proportion of formally trained individuals in the Indian workforce in the age group of 19 to 24 years has increased from 2.4% in 2004-05 to 4.1% in 2023-24. Only about 5% of the students are currently enrolled in vocational courses. The Prime Minister's Internship Scheme (PMIS) 2025 is a key initiative launched to bridge this gap and enhance the employability of India's youth, which provides real-world exposure to fresh graduates. As a part of this scheme, about 1.53 lakh internship offers were made by about 500 companies, across two rounds in October 24 and January 2025 and some 50,000 graduates accepted the offers. Quality improvement and accreditation Last five years have seen concerted efforts towards quality improvement, significantly influenced by initiatives like the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF). NIRF 2024, in its ninth edition, has seen 86% growth in participation, from 3,500 institutions in its inaugural year to over 6,500 unique institutions, across 16 categories. While NIRF focuses on ranking, the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) plays a crucial role in the direct accreditation of the institutions. As of January 2025, about 43% of the universities and less than 20% of the colleges are NAAC accredited. In line with the recommendation of Dr. Radhakrishnan Committee report (2024) on transformative reforms in accreditation, NAAC plans to introduce binary accreditation system, which is expected to accelerate the pace of accreditation in the days to come. Challenges and suggestions Despite the advancements, the NEP 2020 implementation journey has been characterised by formidable challenges. Significant deficits in physical and digital infrastructure, a critical shortage of qualified teachers, the enduring digital divide, and constraints in additional financial allocation pose major hurdles. There is a critical shortage of qualified teachers to meet the increasing student numbers. Challenges extend beyond the mere number of teachers to encompass the need for comprehensive teacher preparation programs, reskilling faculty for new pedagogies, and adapting to transparent assessment practices. Addressing regional disparities and ensuring equitable access and quality for all socio-economic groups will continue to be a formidable challenge. Enhanced public-private partnerships, targeted capacity building for faculty, and robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are crucial. Online education, as a growth driver to enhance enrolments In order to achieve the GER target of 50% by 2035, it is estimated that nearly eight crore students need to be enrolled, which works out to be additional enrolment of about three crore students in the next 10 years. It is a daunting task, considering that the pace of enrolments in the last five to 10 years has been about 15 lakhs-18 lakhs per year in the existing institutions. It calls for substantial investment in infrastructure and capacity building towards the expansion of existing institutions and setting up new ones. Considering the response to the online education programs in the last five years, it may be a good strategy to leverage online education to grow enrolments. Currently, less than 10% of the existing universities are approved by the UGC to offer online degree programs due to the stringent eligibility criteria, based on the NIRF ranking and NAAC accreditation score. The government may review the guidelines for eligibility and allow more universities to offer online programs, without sacrificing quality. This could facilitate a jump in enrolments in the next five years. It is also essential ensure more robust digital infrastructure and connectivity in rural and remote areas to bridge the digital divide. (Prof O.R.S. Rao is the Chancellor of the ICFAI University, Sikkim)
The Print
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Print
NEP turns 5: Gains, gaps & ground realities, a report card on India's biggest education reform
However, five years on, with many of the schemes and programmes recommended under the policy now running, the implementation remains uneven—varying widely across states, regions, and even individual institutions. In many parts of the country, it is fragmented and inconsistent. NEP 2020 prescribed focus on foundational literacy and numeracy, multidisciplinary education, experiential learning, digital pedagogies, improved access, increasing the gross enrolment ratio in higher education, and promoting research and vocational training. It also prioritised education in the mother tongue, promotion of India's traditional knowledge, and internationalisation of the education system, among other objectives. New Delhi: With the aim to modernise India's education system—all the way from pre-school to PhD—while keeping it 'rooted in Indian ethos', the National Education Policy (NEP) was released on 29 July, 2020 in the middle of the Covid pandemic. Framed by a high-powered committee led by former ISRO chief K. Kasturirangan, it was the third education policy of the country after 1968 and 1986. One of the major policy recommendations—setting up an overarching body intended to serve as a single-window regulator for higher education, called the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI)—is yet to be implemented, with even the bill yet to be finalised by the government. And while the system is making steady progress towards the predicted outcomes under NEP 2020, various stakeholders that ThePrint spoke to believe it is still too early to expect widespread results in a diverse country like India, where education is a concurrent subject. 'In a country like ours, where we're accustomed to over-structured systems, the idea of academic freedom and exploration can feel unfamiliar, even unsettling. That's why many fear it may fail, or struggle to see how it can be implemented with the same level of rigour,' educationist and policy strategist Meeta Sengupta told ThePrint. Also Read: Next chapter, India's military might. NCERT preparing module on Op Sindoor for classes 3-12 The row over three-language formula NEP's implementation has been mired in controversy from the beginning. Soon after the policy came into force, Opposition-ruled states objected to the three-language formula—mandating that students learn three Indian languages up to Class 8, and preferably till Class 10. Southern states, particularly Tamil Nadu, have objected, arguing that it promotes 'Hindi imposition'—even though NEP 2020 does not mandate or prefer any specific language under the formula. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan have had several exchanges over the issue, including spats on social media and in official letters this year itself. In a letter in February, Pradhan had urged Stalin to 'rise above political differences', adding that it is inappropriate for the state to view the policy with a 'myopic vision'. In June, the Mahayuti-led Maharashtra government withdrew its decision of introducing Hindi as the third language, following strong uproar by the Opposition. The state has otherwise adopted NEP 2020. However, the 2020 policy is not the first one to recommend the three-language formula. It has been in practice since the 1968 education policy. Currently, all states and Union Territories—except Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal—have begun adopting NEP 2020 in a phased manner. In May, the Supreme Court had dismissed a plea seeking directions to these three states to implement it, saying that it cannot compel states to adopt a particular government policy. NEP 2020 focuses on using mother tongue or local languages as medium of instruction for children up to Class 5, and preferably up to Class 8, citing studies that have shown that children learn and grasp non-trivial concepts more quickly in their home language. Over the last five years, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has released textbooks in 22 scheduled Indian languages. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has also asked schools to conduct language mapping of the students, and start offering education in regional languages. This is not limited to schools. The government has also introduced technical and medical courses in local languages over the past few years. However, there have been concerns over job prospects of students pursuing professional courses in regional languages. PM-SHRI scheme: Bone of contention Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Kerala's standoff with the Centre worsened after the government announced the PM Schools for Rising India (PM-SHRI) scheme in September 2022, which aimed to upgrade existing schools into model institutions that reflect the vision of NEP 2020, with financial support provided by Centre. However, a key prerequisite for participation was signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the central government to adopt NEP, which the three states opposed, deeming it as 'imposition'. These three states have not yet signed an MoU to adopt the scheme, and as a result, the Centre has withheld their funds for the government's flagship universal education programme, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), under which PM-SHRI is included. In a response to a Parliament question on 21 July, the Union education ministry informed that no funds were released to these three states under SSA in the 2024-25 academic year. Some other states, including Delhi and Punjab, had also resisted initially, but they eventually signed the MoUs after their SSA funds were withheld. 'Decolonisation' of education The National Curriculum Framework (NCF), which serves as the guiding document for school education and textbook development, was released for the foundational stage in 2022, and for the rest of school education in 2023. NCF emphasises incorporating Indian context into education to foster pride in the country's culture. Releasing the guidelines in 2022, Education Minister Pradhan had said that NCF's mandates aim to 'decolonise India's education system'. Between last year and this year, NCERT has released new textbooks up to Class 8. The common features of these books include greater emphasis on Indian contributions to Science and Mathematics, references to Harappan civilisation as the Sindhu-Sarasvati civilisation, use of 'Bharat' instead of 'India' in most instances, and reduced focus on the Mughals and Delhi Sultanate. For example, the new Class 7 Social Science textbook released this April omits references to Mughals and Delhi Sultanate entirely, and instead introduces chapters on ancient Indian dynasties, like the Magadha kingdom, Mauryas, Shungas, and Sātavāhanas. The new Class 8 Social Science textbook released in July reintroduces the Mughals, but presents them differently compared to older textbooks—highlighting instances of 'brutality' and 'religious intolerance' during their rule. Meanwhile, the Marathas are portrayed in a more glorified light. While experts have described the changes as an 'ideological move' that selectively glorifies or vilifies historical figures, NCERT has defended them as an objective portrayal of history. The new textbooks also include references to India's ancient knowledge systems, make greater use of Sanskrit vocabulary, and feature stories of war heroes. Similarly, in higher education, NEP has introduced Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS), adding indigenous content to the curriculum, with new courses on Yoga, Vedic Mathematics, Astronomy, and other aspects of ancient Indian knowledge. Also Read: Just 35% govt schools in India have smart classrooms, Bihar & UP among worst performers—Centre to Parliament School education structure overhaul NEP 2020 replaced the existing 10+2 school education structure with a new 5+3+3+4 framework, covering children from ages 3 to 18 in four stages—Foundational (three years of Anganwadi/pre-school plus Grades 1–2, for ages 3–8), Preparatory (Grades 3–5, ages 8–11), Middle Stage (Grades 6–8, ages 11–14), and Secondary (Grades 9–12, divided into two phases: Grades 9–10 and 11–12, for ages 14–18). The policy emphasises on early childhood care and education (ECCE), giving 'highest priority' to achieving universal foundational literacy and numeracy (FLN) by the end of Class 3. 'The rest of this policy will become relevant for our students only if this most basic learning requirement—reading, writing, and arithmetic at the foundational level—is first achieved,' it states. On 5 July, 2021, then Union Education Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal had launched the National Initiative for Proficiency in Reading with Understanding and Numeracy (NIPUN Bharat), with the aim to ensure that every child in India attains FLN by 2026–27 via interventions like intensive teacher training, innovative pedagogies, play-based and experiential learning, and structured assessments. Under the same initiative, the ministry also launched 'Jadui Pitara', a collection of learning teaching material (LTM) for the 3-6 years age group, in February 2023. NIPUN Bharat is a part of Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan. According to teachers and principals at various schools, this was the first time a targeted approach was taken towards improving the financial literacy and numeracy skills of younger children. Vineeta Nanda, an English teacher at Delhi's Mount Abu Public School, told ThePrint that she has explored various innovative teaching methods in her 17-year career, but the transformation she has seen in the past five years is unprecedented. 'Under NEP 2020, we've shifted from traditional textbook-based instruction to play-based and story-based learning—even in subjects like English. For instance, when teaching grammar, I take students outside to the garden. I point to objects and ask them to identify nouns and pronouns. It makes learning more interactive, relatable, and fun,' she said. However, the implementation of NIPUN Bharat initiative and focus on FLN differs in private and government schools, with the latter finding it difficult to implement the recommendations due to limited resources, shortage of teachers and poor infrastructure. Vipin Prakash, president of Rajasthan Primary School Association, said that little has changed so far in government schools. 'We've been told that textbooks will be revised under NEP 2020 up to Class 5, but we haven't received them yet. We also haven't received any training on NEP.' Due to the digital divide, government schools are also finding it difficult to adopt digital learning as prescribed under the policy. 'Most government schools like ours lack functional computers and the internet. How are we expected to use digital tools, like the DIKSHA portal?' Syed Mohammad Inaam, principal of a government girls' senior secondary school in Ferozepur Jhirka, Haryana, told ThePrint. DIKSHA (Digital Infrastructure for Knowledge Sharing) is a national digital platform developed by the education ministry to serve as a repository of learning resources for school education in India. Teething issues apart, there has been significant improvement in overall learning outcomes at foundational level since NEP's launch. The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2024, released in January 2025 by the NGO Pratham, highlighted significant progress in foundational learning among children in rural India. Similarly, the PARAKH Rashtriya Sarvekshan—formerly known as the National Achievement Survey (NAS)—released in July also showed improved performance among Class 3 students, compared to the 2021 assessment. This report, too, acknowledged the role of NIPUN Bharat in driving these gains. Shaveta Sharma-Kukreja, CEO and MD of Central Square Foundation, which works in the field of early education, said that FLN is not just an educational goal, but an economic imperative. 'By 2047, 950 million Indians—25 percent of the global workforce—will enter the job market. Of them, 250 million will pass through primary schools in the next two decades. By prioritising FLN, NEP 2020 did what few policies have managed. It realigned India's education system with the science of learning and the needs of a young, ambitious nation. It placed the youngest child at the centre of reform, and ensured that every child, regardless of background, has a real shot at a better future,' she told ThePrint. But challenges remain. Several schools are facing trouble in implementing the six-year age mandate for admission to Class 1. Schools had nursery and kindergarten in which they were enrolling 3 and 4-year-olds. But with NEP 2020 fixing the age limit of six years for Class 1, all schools will now have to add one more class in the foundational stage. Sudha Acharya, principal of ITL Public School in Delhi's Dwarka, said, 'To add another class, schools will need additional classrooms—and many simply don't have the space. More staff and infrastructure, including support from the board, will also be necessary. We have already built four additional rooms, but many schools are facing challenges. Also, many students who are supposed to come in Class 1 are not 6-year-old yet. What do we do in such cases? We are still awaiting some clarity.' Changes in assessment The policy emphasises continuous, multidimensional assessment of students, rather than relying on a single high-stakes exam, with the aim to discourage 'rote learning'. In line with the same, PARAKH (Performance Assessment, Review, and Analysis of Knowledge for Holistic Development), a body established under NCERT, designed the Holistic Progress Card (HPC) framework, which will be in digital format, which takes into account feedback from peers, parents, and self-assessment of students to track their progress throughout the year. According to latest data by PARAKH, 26 states and UTs have either adopted HPC up to Class 8, or are in the process of doing so. But while many private schools have adopted the framework, government schools are still 'not even aware of HPC's existence'. 'To adopt it, we first need proper digital infrastructure,' said Dinesh Chandra Sharma, president of Uttar Pradesh Teachers' Federation. For the secondary stage, NEP 2020 suggested eliminating the 'high-stakes' aspect of board exams. In June, CBSE announced a two-phase board exam policy for Class 10, starting with 2026 exams. The first phase, mandatory for all students, will be held in February–March, followed by the second in May, which will be for those who receive a compartment in the first, or want to improve in up to three subjects. The two-exam policy has, however, raised concerns over logistical challenges. Aditi Misra, director of Delhi Public School, Sector 45, Gurgaon, appreciated the intent behind the move, but noted that practical challenges are significant. 'From a school's perspective, this will mean twice the planning, preparation, and evaluation effort—not to mention the emotional load on teachers and students. For it to succeed, we'll need additional support, training, and infrastructure. There's also a risk that well-resourced schools may cope more easily, widening the gap with others, unless the system is made more equitable,' she told ThePrint. NEP in colleges & universities NEP 2020 envisions flexible undergraduate programmes of up to four years, offering multiple entry and exit options. In 2021, the University Grants Commission (UGC), India's higher education regulator, issued guidelines to operationalise this model, under which, students can exit after one year with a certificate, after two years with a diploma, three years with a degree, or four years with a degree with honours and research. The policy recommended a one-year masters programme after a four-year degree, and discontinued the MPhil degree. To support this structure, UGC launched the Academic Bank of Credits (ABC) in 2021 on the first anniversary of NEP 2020. The ABC serves as a digital repository that records and tracks the academic credits earned by students across institutions. Additionally, the UGC introduced the National Credit Framework (NCrF), which allows the 'creditisation' of all forms of learning—formal and informal—based on proper assessment. This means students can earn academic credits not just through classroom instruction, but also through laboratory work, online courses, innovation labs, sports, yoga, physical activities, performing arts, and more. Former UGC chairperson M. Jagadesh Kumar said that prior to NEP 2020, India's education system was rigid and compartmentalised, but now it is being reoriented to promote student mobility, digital integration and academic flexibility. 'With the introduction of mechanisms, like ABC and NCrF, students can enter and exit their educational journey without losing prior learning. This signals to students that education is a continuum, not a closed door. The new four-year undergraduate framework now accommodates research, vocational skills, flexibility, and clearly defined exit options,' he told ThePrint. More than 200 higher education institutions have adopted the four-year programme so far. However, several institutions, including the University of Delhi (DU), are facing major infrastructural challenges as they prepare to welcome the first batch of fourth-year students on 1 August. A.K. Bhagi, president of DU Teachers' Association (DUTA), said that the majority of the university colleges are struggling to accommodate an additional batch of students. 'Colleges need extra infrastructure, more teachers, and financial support to upgrade their facilities. Otherwise, this smooth transition is not possible,' he said. Common entrance exam NEP 2020 envisioned a common entrance exam to replace the multiple, separate tests conducted by individual universities—aiming to significantly reduce the burden on students, institutions and the overall education system. The UGC introduced the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) for undergraduate and postgraduate admissions in 2022. The test, conducted in online format by the National Testing Agency (NTA), completely overhauled the admission process for universities, even as there were several infrastructural challenges in its initial year, with multiple sessions being cancelled due to technical and digital issues. According to former UGC chairperson Kumar, while CUET initially challenged existing inequities, it quickly created a more level playing field. 'For the first time, students from tribal districts, rural schools, and non-elite urban institutions could access the same admission process as those from historically privileged systems,' he said. 'CUET is creating a fairer starting line for students from diverse backgrounds by disrupting the old pattern of exclusion based on inconsistent marking systems.' The introduction of CUET has received mixed reactions, with some DU faculty members claiming that it has led to vacant seats. Naveen Gaur, associate professor of Physics at Dyal Singh College, said that his college has 2,200 sanctioned seats for third-year admissions, but only around 1,600 students enrolled. 'In the second year, the gap is around 20 percent. A centralised single test system doesn't work for all colleges. It benefits elite institutions and popular courses. For less sought-after courses, students often don't apply through such centralised tests.' Also Read: After 'sugar boards', CBSE asks schools to display 'oil boards' to promote healthy eating among students 'Dilution of courses' A section of teachers has alleged that the changes in course structures and curriculum under NEP 2020 have diluted the 'core papers'. Several universities have introduced short term credit-based Value Added Courses (VACs) to promote multidisciplinary learning and provide students with skills beyond their core academic subjects. DU offers a variety of VACs, including Ayurveda and Nutrition, Yoga, Fit India, Vedic Mathematics, and courses on the Bhagavad Gita. Gaur said that the time devoted to core papers has not been adjusted to accommodate these generic courses. 'The VACs are not useful at all. They're just weakening the students' academic foundation.' Teachers at Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) have raised similar concerns. 'They (VACs) offer no additional value to students within their core disciplines,' said Moushumi Basu, an associate professor. The university has introduced VACs in subjects like Yoga and Wellness, Indian Knowledge Systems, Thinking in Sanskrit, and Environmental Science, among others. Under the policy, students who complete a four-year undergraduate degree with research with 7.5 CGPA are eligible for direct admission into PhD programmes, without requiring a master's degree. Tanvir Aeijaz, associate professor of Political Science at DU's Ramjas College, said the removal of the traditional academic pathway—two years of Masters and two years of MPhil—will weaken the foundation for PhD students. 'The kind of depth and specialisation that came with a two-year Masters programme is simply missing in the new four-year undergraduate degree. Earlier, students were rigorously trained in core and elective areas, followed by a dissertation in MPhil that prepared them for serious research. Without that, we're going to see a dilution in the quality of PhDs,' he said. But ex-UGC Chairperson Kumar said that the four-year honours programme preserves the depth of a major discipline through advanced coursework and research, while also allowing students to engage with knowledge beyond their core field. Internationalisation of India's education system The government has also taken several initiatives to internationalise the country's education system, in line with NEP 2020's recommendation to promote India as a global academic destination, and restore its role as a 'Vishwa Guru', encouraging high-performing Indian universities to set up campuses abroad, and inviting selected top global universities to operate in India. IIT Madras launched its Zanzibar campus in 2023. IIT Delhi has set up a campus in Abu Dhabi, and IIM Ahmedabad is expanding to Dubai. Following the recommendations, in November 2023, the UGC (Setting up and Operation of Campuses of Foreign Higher Educational Institutions in India) Regulations were notified, allowing the top 500 universities worldwide to apply to set up campuses in India, and launching a dedicated portal for this purpose. Last year, UK's University of Southampton became the first university to receive UGC's approval, and is now setting up a campus in Gurugram. The University of Liverpool has also received the nod for a campus in Bengaluru. Two Australian universities also set up their campuses in GIFT City, Gujarat, in accordance with International Financial Services Centres Authority (IFSCA) regulations. Besides, the UGC's joint, dual, and twinning degree regulation has also helped over a hundred Indian institutions collaborate with foreign universities to create mutually recognised programmes, where a student could spend some time in India and the rest abroad. 'With internationalisation, there are many tangible benefits for Indian students, such as cost-effective global exposure, credit mobility and flexibility, diverse learning ecology and global credentials without moving out of India,' former UGC chairperson Kumar said. (Edited by Mannat Chugh) Also Read: Centre's school education assessment flags learning gaps—Maths least favourite, govt schools lag behind
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
UGC, AICTE, NCTE to be scrapped: Will a new super-regulator end the chaos these three could never control?
India's higher education gears up for a major reset as the proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) aims to replace decades-old regulators—UGC, AICTE, and NCTE—with a single, streamlined authority. India's higher education system—spread across 1,113 universities and 43,796 colleges, according to the AISHE 2021–22—is heading for what may be its most sweeping institutional overhaul since the university system was nationalised. The government has dusted off its reformist rhetoric to dismantle a decades-old triad of regulatory overlords: the University Grants Commission ( UGC ), the All India Council for Technical Education ( AICTE ), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). In their place, it proposes a singular body—the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI)—tasked with doing everything the other three were supposed to do, but better, faster, and without the administrative clumsiness. This wasn't a bolt from the blue. Policymakers had flagged the chaos earlier too. The National Knowledge Commission (2005–2009) warned of regulatory fragmentation and called for the dismantling of the UGC-AICTE-NCTE triad. It was followed by the Yash Pal Committee Report (2009), which made an even more urgent pitch: 'Multiplicity of regulatory agencies leads to lack of coordination and policy incoherence.' Neither report was fully acted upon. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Gentle Japanese hair growth method for men and women's scalp Hair's Rich Learn More Undo Successive governments chose to tinker, not transform. Then again in 2018, under the Ministry of Human Resource Development (now renamed Ministry of Education), policymakers pitched HECI as a leaner and allegedly more autonomous alternative to the UGC. The concept matured in the National Education Policy 2020, which went a step further—recommending the merger of all three regulators into a single apex commission. One ring to rule them all. At first glance, it sounds like a long-overdue bureaucratic detox. But beneath the calls for efficiency and streamlining lies a deeper story—one of centralised control, collapsed specialisation, and the quiet possibility of academic overreach. Because whenever a government promises to fix complexity with centralisation, it's not just structure that gets rewritten. The soul of the system changes too. So the questions write themselves: Why now? Why one regulator? And who watches the one who watches everyone else? A legacy of silos and silence Historically, India's post-independence higher education system relied on a sector-specific regulatory structure, with different bodies overseeing different streams of education. The University Grants Commission (UGC), established in 1956, was responsible for regulating universities and general higher education institutions. It handled tasks such as funding allocations, curriculum development, and maintaining academic standards across disciplines like arts, science, and commerce. The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), originally set up in 1945 and granted statutory status in 1987, was tasked with overseeing technical and professional education, including engineering, management, architecture, pharmacy, and hotel management. Meanwhile, the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), established in 1995, regulated teacher education programmes, setting norms, granting approvals, and monitoring institutions offering degrees such as and Each of these regulators operated in isolation, with distinct mandates and regulatory frameworks—a model that made sense when disciplines were neatly boxed, institutions were fewer, and regulation meant inspection rather than innovation. But the 21st-century Indian campus is anything but boxed. A single institution may today offer a in AI, a in science pedagogy, and a minor in ethics and literature—and find itself caught in a three-way tug-of-war between regulatory bodies who seldom talk to each other. The result? Not oversight, but overhead. Not accountability, but administrative fatigue. Where did things go wrong? On paper, the tripartite regulatory model—UGC for universities, AICTE for technical education, and NCTE for teacher training—was neat, logical, and compartmentalised. But by the late 2000s, the system began to unravel under the weight of its own silos. India's higher education was evolving, institutions were expanding, disciplines were blending—and the regulators stayed frozen in time. Overlapping jurisdictions, colliding mandates The first cracks appeared when colleges started breaking out of their traditional academic ghettos. A private university might now offer an integrated in Data Science with a liberal arts minor. An institute of education might pair a with environmental studies or STEM modules. Sounds progressive? Yes. But for the regulators, it triggered a turf war. In such cases, the institution had to seek separate approvals from UGC, AICTE, and NCTE—each with its own forms, deadlines, inspections, and (often contradictory) compliance requirements. What followed was: Duplication of compliance: One course. Three sets of paperwork. Dozens of inspections. Conflicting mandates: What AICTE allowed in the name of innovation, UGC might reject as non-conforming. Funding delays: Institutions caught in the crossfire often lost out on timely grants and accreditations. In short, the multi-regulator setup became less about quality assurance and more about bureaucratic endurance. Fragmented quality control While regulatory overlaps created confusion, quality control turned into a blindfolded relay race. All of the three bodies—UGC, AICTE, and NCTE—ran their own accreditation show. They used different metrics, had separate assessor pools, and often reached conflicting conclusions about the same institution. There was: No unified quality benchmark: What counted as 'excellent' for UGC might be sub-par by AICTE standards. Interdisciplinary blind spots: A university with strong arts and tech programmes might ace UGC review but stumble with AICTE red tape. Opaque student experience: For learners navigating cross-disciplinary degrees, the regulatory alphabet soup offered little clarity and even less consistency. At the heart of it, there was no single dashboard, no composite score, no common yardstick for institutional performance. Inefficient governance and regulatory fatigue Beyond structural flaws, each of the three regulators carried its own baggage. UGC, burdened with both funding and monitoring powers, often found itself in a conflicted dual role—allocating grants while also policing quality. This raised perennial questions about fairness, favouritism, and political influence. AICTE, though credited with standardising technical education, developed a reputation for rigidity and red tape. While industries moved toward emerging tech, AICTE's curriculum norms were often several updates behind. NCTE, perhaps the weakest of the three, became infamous for its inability to curb the proliferation of dubious teacher training colleges, especially in smaller towns. The result: thousands of 'recognised' institutes with questionable teaching capacity and negligible placements. What emerged was a governance model where no single body could be held fully accountable, and all three seemed to operate in parallel bureaucracies, rarely in sync, and often in conflict. Enter HECI: What it promises to fix U nlike its predecessors, HECI isn't a one-department show. It's structured around four autonomous verticals, each focused on a distinct function. NHERC: Regulation without redundancy The National Higher Education Regulatory Council (NHERC) will be the front-facing gatekeeper—handling approvals, compliance, and the creation of academic norms. Its job is to bring clarity to the tangled web of regulations by becoming the single-window authority for all higher education institutions (except medical and legal). This means no more running from UGC to AICTE to NCTE for the same degree programme. NAC: Accreditation that speaks one language Accreditation duties will shift to the National Accreditation Council (NAC). Unlike today's fractured system where different bodies use different metrics, NAC is meant to apply a uniform, outcome-based framework for quality assurance. One council, one scale, one yardstick—for all institutions, regardless of discipline. HEGC: Funding that rewards merit The Higher Education Grants Council (HEGC) will take over funding responsibilities from UGC—but with a twist. Instead of discretionary allocations and opaque grants, HEGC is expected to link funding to performance. Think academic outcomes, research impact, graduate employability—not just political connections or compliance checkboxes. GEC: Curriculum that reflects the present Lastly, the General Education Council (GEC) will steer the academic ship. It will define learning outcomes, curricular frameworks, and pedagogical standards across institutions. Its aim is to modernise what's taught and how, making sure Indian students aren't studying for yesterday's job market. What's the real pitch? At its core, HECI is being sold as a regulatory reset—streamlined, centralised, and outcomes-driven, replacing clutter with clarity. One regulator, less bureaucracy Perhaps the biggest headline is administrative simplicity. HECI's integrated model means institutions will no longer bounce between three regulatory bodies. Compliance processes are expected to be leaner, faster, and less redundant. One standard, clearer quality With NAC at the helm, the patchwork of quality assessments will be replaced with a single, transparent accreditation system. Students and parents may finally get a clear, comparable picture of institutional performance. One body, more accountability Instead of UGC blaming AICTE or NCTE washing its hands off quality lapses, HECI creates a unified command. With verticals working in tandem, there's less room for regulatory blame games and more space for system-wide accountability. From control to outcomes HECI is also being pitched as a philosophical shift—from an input-focused, micromanaging bureaucracy to an outcome-driven regulator. In theory, it will care more about results than rules, creating room for greater institutional autonomy. Money follows merit Under HEGC, public funding may finally move toward performance-linked models—rewarding institutions that innovate, publish, and place, rather than simply comply. The goal is to incentivise quality, not paperwork. But HECI isn't a silver bullet: The risks and red flags For all its ambition, HECI carries risks that policymakers cannot afford to ignore: Excessive centralisation Critics fear HECI could become a super-regulator with too much power concentrated at the Centre. If not insulated from political influence, it could be used to enforce ideological conformity across campuses. Loss of domain expertise AICTE and NCTE, for all their flaws, brought specialised understanding of engineering and teacher education. Merging everything under one roof may dilute this expertise unless HECI's verticals are empowered with expert teams. Academic autonomy at risk NEP 2020 advocates 'light but tight' regulation. But if HECI dictates curriculum frameworks, funding norms, and accreditation—all at once—autonomy could become a buzzword, not a reality. Bureaucratic bottlenecks A monolithic body may end up replicating the red tape of its predecessors. Institutional grievances could get lost in the system if not backed by robust grievance redressal mechanisms. So, will HECI deliver? The idea of HECI, on its own, is not the problem. In fact, it reads like a long-overdue footnote to a history of regulatory disarray—one that spans decades of overlapping jurisdictions, incoherent policy mandates, and watchdogs too exhausted to bark. As a concept, it echoes earlier reformist impulses—from the National Knowledge Commission's call for consolidation to the Yash Pal Committee's plea for coherence—both of which gathered dust in government archives while institutional entropy thrived. But as any student of policy will tell you, ideas don't govern—structures do, and structures are only as good as those who operate them. If executed with clarity, autonomy, and genuine insulation from political puppeteering, HECI could finally offer India what the UK has in the Office for Students, or Australia in TEQSA: a regulator that enforces standards without stifling thought, and funds institutions without measuring their worth in compliance checklists. But done badly—and that's not a hypothetical in Indian policy history—it could become yet another monolith with a new acronym and the same old reflexes: delay, dilution, and disinterest in outcomes. New gatekeepers, same revolving doors. As the draft bill inches closer to reality, the real question is not just what HECI abolishes, but what it institutionalises in its place. Because a unified regulator should never become a uniform regulator. And in a democracy that aspires to knowledge leadership, simplification must never come at the cost of dissent, complexity, or intellectual autonomy. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
NDTV
6 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
Draft Bill In The Works To Replace UGC, AICTE, NCTE: Education Ministry Informs Lok Sabha
New Delhi: Minister of State for Education, Sukanta Majumdar informed the Lok Sabha on Monday that the Ministry of Education is in the process of drafting a legislation to set up the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), a proposed unified regulatory body for higher education. "The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 envisions a 'light but tight' regulatory framework to ensure integrity, transparency, and resource efficiency in the education system through audit and public disclosure, while promoting innovation, autonomy, and good governance," said Sukanta Majumdar. As outlined in the NEP, the proposed HECI will function as an umbrella body with separate verticals dedicated to regulation, accreditation, funding, and setting academic standards. It is intended to replace existing regulatory bodies such as the University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). Majumdar further added, "The NEP proposes the creation of the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) as a comprehensive body with independent verticals for regulation, accreditation, funding, and academic standard-setting. In line with this vision, the Ministry is currently drafting the HECI bill." At present, the UGC is responsible for regulating non-technical higher education, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education. The concept of bringing these functions under a single regulator was first introduced in a 2018 draft bill that sought to repeal the UGC Act and was later released for public consultation. Efforts to establish the HECI picked up pace after Dharmendra Pradhan took charge as Union Education Minister in July 2021. The idea of forming a unified higher education regulator was first introduced in a draft bill in 2018. The Higher Education Commission of India (Repeal of University Grants Commission Act) Bill, which aimed to repeal the UGC Act and create the HECI, was made public that year for feedback and consultation with stakeholders. Reinforcing the need for such reform, the NEP 2020 states, "the regulatory system is in need of a complete overhaul in order to re-energise the higher education sector and enable it to thrive." The NEP thereby stresses the need for a complete overhaul of the current regulatory structure to modernise India's higher education system and align it with global standards.
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Govt in process of drafting bill for unified higher education body: Minister
New Delhi, Jul 21 (PTI) The Ministry of Education is in the process of drafting a bill for establishing a higher education commission of India (HECI), proposed as a unified higher education regulatory body, the Lok Sabha was informed on Monday. Govt in process of drafting bill for unified higher education body: Minister of State for Education Sukanta Majumdar(ANI/File) Union Minister of State for Education Sukanta Majumdar shared the information in a written reply to a question. "The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 envisions a 'light but tight' regulatory framework to ensure integrity, transparency and resource efficiency of the educational system through audit and public disclosure while encouraging innovation and out-of-the-box ideas through autonomy, good governance and empowerment," Majumdar said. "The NEP 2020 further envisions setting up of a Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) as an umbrella body with independent verticals to perform distinct functions of regulation, accreditation, funding and academic standard setting. Considering the above vision of NEP 2020, the ministry is in the process of drafting a HECI bill," he added. The HECI, which was proposed in the new NEP, looks to replace the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). While the UGC oversees non-technical higher education, the AICTE oversees technical education and the NCTE is the regulatory body for teachers' education. The concept of the HECI has been discussed before in the form of a draft bill. A draft Higher Education Commission of India (Repeal of University Grants Commission Act) Bill, 2018, which seeks to repeal the UGC Act and provides for setting up of the Higher Education Commission of India, was put in the public domain that year for feedback and consultation with stakeholders. Renewed efforts to make the HECI a reality were then initiated under Dharmendra Pradhan, who took over as Union education minister in July 2021. Underlining the relevance of a single higher education regulator, the NEP 2020 document says, "the regulatory system is in need of a complete overhaul in order to re-energise the higher education sector and enable it to thrive".
